show_version
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds specificity by naming 'MCP platform and adapter versions,' which is helpful, but it does not elaborate on output format or other behavioral aspects. This is adequate for a trivial version-check tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a parameterless, read-only version-checking tool with strong annotation coverage, the description is fully sufficient. It states exactly what information is shown (platform and adapter versions) and implies no side effects.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to misinterpret. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description correctly implies no inputs are required.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Show') and target ('current MCP platform and adapter versions'). It is distinct from sibling tools which handle authentication, connectivity, marketplace, bug reporting, and vehicle queries.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage when version information is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Given the simplicity of the tool, the implied usage is acceptable but not explicitly guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several platform-management tools overlap in purpose: authenticate and connect both deal with connection state, while show_version and toolkit_info both return platform status. The marketplace tool is an overloaded catch-all that handles searching, invoking, installing, and billing, making it unclear when to use it versus the other tools.
Naming conventions are mixed: some tools follow verb_noun patterns (authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version), while others are bare nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info). Additionally, the only domain-specific tool uses Portuguese (veiculo_nacional_consultar) while the rest use English, creating a language inconsistency.
The server is named 'Consulta Veicular Nacional' and appears focused on vehicle lookup, yet only 1 of 7 tools actually performs that function. The other 6 are generic platform utilities unrelated to the stated purpose, making the tool count feel bloated and off-target for the server's apparent scope.
For the core domain of vehicle consultation, the single tool veiculo_nacional_consultar provides the essential lookup-by-plate capability with no obvious missing operations. Since it is a read-only public data consultation, CRUD coverage is unnecessary, and the vehicle-related surface appears complete. The extra platform tools do not fill any domain-specific gap.